What do you think needed math…? It’s just my first reaction to how high the $500,000 seemed that she talked about. I really don’t get it. Maybe there’s some American political shitflinging going on that I don’t know about since this has got a load of people upset without any reason that I can figure out.

It’s amazing that you still don’t get what’s happening.

No, I live in Finland

I don’t know if you get that I’m reacting to what she said. Saying she isn’t worth “even” half a million sounded a lot to me since I didn’t realize the average was so high in the US. It sounded high for saying you’re not worth “even” that. Idk if you get what I mean.

But really you’re getting bent out of shape over something very unnecessary. I suggest calming down.

Who said it does? You’re confusing me here

Uhm, it’s her own damn words (from the article):

You are completely making things up. I am not even worth $1 million. Or a half million. I am one of the lowest net worth members of Congress, trade no individual stock, and take no outside income. These filings are public. I loathe corruption, and your lying is reprehensible.

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1887197530573717552

She specifically decided to say “less than half million” which sounded a lot to me.

Man Americans are worth a shitload on average

she is worth less than $500,000

That sounds like a lot of money still, but I’d imagine public figures can easily leverage that to wealth so makes sense

I’m sorry but where in my reply did you get those ideas?

“Recruits”? The concern isn’t people joining something, it’s them agreeing with the message. Less obvious approach already works just fine (probably even better than direct approach) all over the world in selling the message and the hate, so if you think this mandatory year of jail will have much of an effect on that, I have a few other “tough on crime” approaches to sell to you. Might even declare War on Hate in style of War on Drugs.

As usual, people want tough and immediate measures, forgetting about a longer term approach and working to tackle the causes of why this messaging sells so well.

I’m not sure why you think being less obvious is just as effective as being overt.

Oh I don’t think it’s just as effective. It’s not as effective, it’s even more so since it’s easier to get people to agree if you start small and then drop hints slowly. Obvious approach will just drive people away. You don’t start with "sieg heil kill all the untermensch ", you start with something small, saying how foreigners are stealing your jobs or making the housing market suck. Then you can guide them in the direction you want without ever saying it. And shit like that is almost impossible to go after in any sensible way, without a risk of punishing people on very questionable grounds.

This isn’t about people being just openly Nazi but for any “hate-related offense”. If you want to tackle any such thing you might need to look into the root causes of the issues and try to fix those, including tackling concerns from the people who become hateful, such as living conditions, education, that sort of stuff. So much like with criminality. That’s a lot more work than just the “tough on crime” approach of throwing everyone into jail for a year, minimum, and hoping that will work (or rather trying to show to your voters that you’re doing something).

Can you force them to shut the fuck up with their hateful Nazi sit if they want to be a part of society? I think this will sure help.

It will be the same as anywhere that already has this sort of laws, people will be less obvious about it while the same hate and message is out there. I don’t think this will affect anything that giving tougher fines wouldn’t and it would cause more negatives than that does. You could even have stricter punishments for repeat offenders and do fines as day fines. But prison for a year for any such offense? The scale seems off, especially when you consider that the maximum for terrorism related stuff is six years.

They were saying that fines are just a barrier for the poor, so I was asking if that holds true for all fines. That was the actual point you missed.

But sure, in the sense that neither should carry a mandatory jail sentence for a year, they’re the same.

You definitely can scale fines for income. We have that in Finland for more serious traffic violations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

I just don’t believe the severity of the crime here at the lowest end calls for a year in jail. A fine, a hefty one, would serve the purpose better.

Do you think the same about any traffic violation or all fines in general? We should throw people in the jail for a year, mnimum, because otherwise it’s just a tax on not being rich enough for the crime?

Come on now. I’m all for having tougher sentences on the high end for hate related offenses, but a mandatory minimum being year in jail for any such offense, even some dipshit doing a Nazi salute and nothing is else, is just too much. It’s like said, dipshit behaviour but hardly worth a year in jail. And it probably won’t solve the issue anyway. Just putting people in jail seldom does imo. Yanks have already tried that.

It’s nothing to do with paradox of tolerance to think a year’s mandatory jail time for a year is pretty ridiculous for any “hate-related offenses”.

I’m against in general of just throwing people into the slammer and hoping that fixes the issues. Punishment should fit the crime and some dipshit doing some Nazi salute isn’t worth a year in goddamn prison. Give them a hefty fine for first time, sure, but a mandatory sentence of a year for any such offense, just seems too far.

If you consider a fine just a paywall then do you feel like there should be jail sentence for all traffic violations too, for example? A bit ridiculous, imo.

That’s true, then it can be good

Retroactive laws are a horrible idea

One year’s mandatory jail term for any “hate-related offenses” seems a bit far imo. Should be just a fine at least for first offense *on the lightest end, unless it’s some physical attack and stuff like that.